Conde, how much lee-way are you willing to give a film that OVERALL isn't great but has a couple of decent scenes?

Example: Ong Bak 2, overall was pretty shitty. HOWEVER, I liked the croc pit scene, like the end fight scene and liked how Jaa mixed some 5-Animal Kung Fu into his TKD/Muay Boran...so I generally offer my opinion to others that the film was O with the qualifier of "a couple of decent scenes".

You are ready to be a main-stream critic now as most semi-enjoyable movies get trashed by you. Some men dont need Oscar winning movies each and everytime. I would put this movie in the same catagory as Machette and RED.

I have a lot of leeway with movies. Production quality, acting, story; these things are all nice, but the most important thing is always entertainment.

One of my first reviews on the site, Blood and Bone, is pretty terrible as far as film-making standards go, and I said so. However, it was enjoyable and fun, even if it's stupid as hell. The same goes for the Expendables, which I absolutely loved despite it being dumber than Stallone's bicep. Even True Legend, which is almost unwatchably bad in the non-fight scenes, is redeemed because of the fun action.

The Warrior's Way has none of this. Geochilmaru has none of this. Never Surrender has none of this. Obviously, it's very difficult to make a film that is COMPLETELY devoid of decent scenes (The Room, maybe), so every movie has at least something mildly amusing in it. But some films are so imbalanced that at the bottom line, it's not worth your ticket money, in my honest opinion.

Maybe you'll watch Warrior's Way and be totally sold on just the fact that it's ninjas fighting cowboys. More power to you. But as I said in my original review, there's terrible visuals, a boring story, and NO ACTION FOR THE FIRST HALF OF THE FILM. Like, none. I was prepared to forgive Mr. Lee if there was something to keep me entertained during the first two acts, but there was really nothing. And even when the action got started, it's lazy and boring to watch.

If you don't believe me, I can't say anything more. I'm always prepared to defend everything I've written, but I obviously can't stop you from going to the theater if you absolutely must see it on the big screen. You can then come back here and tell me if you think I was off-base or went too far with my analysis. This is a discussion, after all, and maybe you'll have some insights that I missed or didn't care for. Some people find a lot to talk about with Wes Anderson films, I don't really like them (see Sociocide thread if you want to discuss that one further). What I don't want is some person just saying I didn't give the film a fair shake and then never defend the movie itself or counter the points I made. If you're going to talk ****, you should at least be willing to step into the ring.

I have a lot of leeway with movies. Production quality, acting, story; these things are all nice, but the most important thing is always entertainment.

Yes, and sometimes you miss this.

The Warrior's Way has none of this. Geochilmaru has none of this. Never Surrender has none of this. Obviously, it's very difficult to make a film that is COMPLETELY devoid of decent scenes (The Room, maybe), so every movie has at least something mildly amusing in it. But some films are so imbalanced that at the bottom line, it's not worth your ticket money, in my honest opinion.

See this is why you get **** from Der and me on some occasions. It is not COMPLETELY DEVOID of decent scenes. You just don't like what you see and that is fine. Some of your reviews come off as rants against a genre and others don't. Again there is nothing wrong with that but, you are going to get people that disagree.

If you can't handle that, start your own website and disable comments. This one and geo read to me as disappointed rants.

Thenn faster reads like you broke it down with no animosity.

Maybe you'll watch Warrior's Way and be totally sold on just the fact that it's ninjas fighting cowboys. More power to you. But as I said in my original review, there's terrible visuals, a boring story, and NO ACTION FOR THE FIRST HALF OF THE FILM. Like, none. I was prepared to forgive Mr. Lee if there was something to keep me entertained during the first two acts, but there was really nothing. And even when the action got started, it's lazy and boring to watch.

This also depends on how you took the film and one of the problems I have with most critics and reviewers. I do it myself at times and hold movies to a standard that is evolving. I enjoyed it because it was an update of a very old drama. It could have been done better but, it fits with the imagery.

What I don't want is some person just saying I didn't give the film a fair shake and then never defend the movie itself or counter the points I made. If you're going to talk ****, you should at least be willing to step into the ring.

Don't be a hypocrite by saying "I want discussion only on my terms" it makes you sound like rabbit.